1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to a signaling device and emergency alert system for environments where verbal communication is impaired or impossible such as underwater.
2. Prior Art
In the underwater environment, swimmers and divers often find it complicated, if not impossible, to verbally communicate. Air tanks used by divers and snorkels used by swimmers are some of the many items used when swimmers or divers are above, at, or below the surface of the water. These devices along with the water itself create a barrier to the swimmer or diver's making audible sounds.
The limited communication ability between swimmers and divers can at times be life-threatening. Therefore, there exists a great need for a simple, workable, handheld, self-powered underwater signaling device that can be heard over other sounds including, but not limited to, the noise made from a diver's regulator or snorkel. The signaling device should produce an audible sound having a characteristic that is unique and distinguishable from other underwater sounds, and in other words, be indicium. The present invention solves a problem that swimmers and divers have had for decades, allowing them to easily signal each other underwater or under speech limiting conditions.
Over the years, numerous types of existing art with respect to underwater communication devices have been developed. However, conventional underwater communication devices have many deficiencies which discourage most swimmers and divers from using them, and therefore, have not gained wide acceptance and use.
A major problem of many conventional communication devices for use underwater is that they have multiple moving components, which generally increases their risk of failure. Swimmers and divers—know that their hobby or profession is high-risk, and therefore, demand maximum reliability from all of their equipment. To increase reliability, an underwater communication device should be simple in design and should employ a minimum number of components that might fail.
Another downfall of most conventional underwater communication devices is that they require significant maintenance to maintain an acceptable level reliability and performance, such as in U.S. Pat. No. 4,095,667 to Mahig (1978). To reduce maintenance effort and expense while maximizing reliability, a swimmer or diver would surely prefer an underwater communication device that requires only simple maintenance.
Yet another drawback of some conventional underwater communication devices is that they require a diver to enter an unusual or uncomfortable body position such as reaching one arm behind one's back toward the area of the dive tank, as in U.S. Pat. No. 5,129,351 to Feder (1992); or reaching an arm down to one's calf to obtain a dive knife to bang against one's air tank. An underwater signaling device should be non-obtrusive and should be accessible wherever a swimmer or diver needs it quickly and naturally—preferably near a diver's buoyancy compensator or vest or near a swimmer or diver's torso area.
Still another drawback of many conventional underwater communication devices is that they are so difficult to operate that not all swimmers or divers can easily become proficient in their use. An underwater communication device that would be easy to use and understood by any swimmer or diver would be preferable.
Still yet another discouraging feature of some conventional underwater communication devices is that in order to work they must either replace, or be attached to, a standard scuba gear component, such as the buoyancy compensator or a second-stage air regulator. An underwater communication device that would not require interfering or changing the function of any other piece of scuba gear would be preferable.
Still yet another significant problem of many conventional underwater communication devices is that they require an energy source to function. For example, there are underwater communication devices that require a battery to function. However, batteries are not always reliable and a low or dead battery can cause the device to fail. Replacing or recharging batteries is expensive and not convenient. Air pressure is also used as a power source for underwater communication devices. The air pressure could be generated by a scuba tank or from an air compressor; however, it would reduce air available for breathing or would require a secondary remote air source that would be an inconvenience. A swimmer or diver would prefer an underwater communication device that operates off of a simple hand-held activity powered by the user, not electricity, air pressure, or any other artificial energy source.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,160,760 to Rayner (2000) shows a “pistol grip” type device with a complex set of moving parts that are akin to a trigger mechanism, powered by a spring that strikes at a “bell” when the trigger is depressed by the user. The device has two springs in a sealed chamber, however, sealed chambers may pose a problem at depth due to pressure and possible buoyancy issues. While the device holds merits in the very likelihood that it could possibly accomplish its designated task, many complications seem to be obvious in its design, and possible functionality. Furthermore it is not clear, and many tests indicate, that the dampening effect of water would not permit a distinctively loud and attention grabbing acoustic signature to be produced by such a device. It is also important to add that the complexity of the moving parts and the design, defeat a measure of reliability and resilience that swimmers and divers look for, since the effects of water and salt water and the rough handling the swim and dive equipment typically receives will put any device under a considerable amount of stress. Furthermore the hydrodynamic profile of moving a bell-shaped device through water may cause it to create movement and vibration similar to that of a fishing lure, causing discomfort and distraction for the swimmer or diver.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,652,734 to Fish (1997) shows an alternate method, in which a sealed tubular device encloses ball bearings or any other matter that when shaken, will emit sound much like a musical device many percussionists use when performing. While simple in design, the device is surprisingly heavy, may display buoyancy issues, and due to obvious “sealed” air space, could result in a collapse of structure or water flooding at depth. The device must be “stored” in a pocket of the vest, or hung from the equipment leaving it free to rattle around randomly. Furthermore the device must be shaken vigorously when used, which is obtrusive to swimmers and divers, and if not cared for continuously, may as previously stated, emit noise randomly. Many swimmers and divers also state that the device does not produce enough of a sound to be effective underwater and have discontinued its use.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,129,351 to Feder (1992) shows a simple rubber loop that has a ball attached to it. This device is slipped over a dive tank while setting up dive equipment, and is used by reaching behind one's back toward the tank and pulling the ball away from the tank then releasing it, causing the ball to strike the tank and produce a desirable acoustic signature. This alternate method, while very simple, presents a new set of challenges to divers in that the device is typically uncomfortable to use, since the diver must unnaturally reach his or her arm back behind their body, which is difficult when wearing full equipment. The device must be re-seated on each new tank as the diver changes out empty air tanks for full ones. Divers need to “feel around” without the benefit of having eyesight behind ones' back to find the ball to activate the device, which can be challenging in an emergency situation. Some divers also use expensive, painted tanks and are vehemently opposed to striking them purposely with any object. Furthermore, the acoustic signature tends to resonate very closely to the diver's ear since the top of dive tanks are closely positioned to a diver's head. Straps and stays that hold the tank in place also may dampen the sound produced by the device.
Other “pneumatic” driven devices that are typically attached to the 2nd stage hose of a diver's air supply equipment have been proposed and some exist, as in U.S. Pat. No. 4,095,667 to Mahig (1978), U.S. Pat. No. 4,852,510 to Joseph (1989), U.S. Pat. No. 4,950,107 to Hancock (1990), U.S. Pat. No. 4,998,499 to Nordbeck (1991), U.S. Pat. No. 5,022,790 to Stevenson (1991), U.S. Pat. No. 5,302,055 to Johnston (1994), U.S. Pat. No. 5,951,205 to Chen (1999), and U.S. Pat No. 6,578,511 to-Dexter (2003). While most are effective, these devices exhibit considerable drawbacks if the diver unexpectedly encounters a prospective lack of air pressure coming from the dive tank. These devices also are comprised of many metal moving parts that will undoubtedly require maintenance, will suffer exposure and likely corrosion, may have a likelihood of failure after extensive operation, and have been known to reduce the value of many swimmers and divers' recreational experiences by being excessively loud, thereby disturbing the tranquil atmosphere enjoyed and sought after by most swimmers and divers. Many swim and dive leaders have outlawed the use of air-powered devices, alleging that they may be obtrusive and obnoxious.
In conclusion, insofar as I am aware, no hand powered device has been produced that is very convenient and easy to use by beginners, novices and experts alike, has very few moving parts, is very resistant to the stresses of a swimmers or diver's environment and handling, produces an alerting yet unobtrusive acoustic signal only on command, is streamlined and convenient in design, all at once. To summarize, the existing underwater communication devices experience one or more of these disadvantages:
(a) are designed using multiple components that can fail;
(b) require substantial maintenance to obtain an acceptable level of reliability and performance;
(c) require too much thinking or practice to use properly and consistently;
(d) involve the adaptation of a swimmer or diver's gear in order to perform;
(e) require an artificial energy source to perform.
(f) are susceptible to the effects of pressure found underwater, and may fail as a result thereof,